Poor, brave David Davis has become the Eddie the Eagle of Westminster

Chingford Man

When will you scribblers realise that we are just not interested in the pathetic posturing of the Cameroon sect? This kind of article is predicated on the belief that what goes on in the Westminster village actually matters. It doesn't. I don't give a toss what George Osborne said and I bet no one else does.

This is the problem with much political coverage. It's rarely about "the isshoos", as Wedgie would say. Often it's politics as a tedious soap opera. Alternatively, it's journalism to advance the interests of a particular faction or to suck up to a particular minister. Frankly there's more purposeful journalism in the non-traditional media.

You lot at the Spectator should be careful that the contempt ordinary people feel towards the political class does not spill over to those who wait upon the politicos.

Rhys

What is brave about causing a by-election having arranged with your main opponents (Libs) not to stand against you - indeed to verbally support you from the sidelines ?
Tories have for a very long time had no coherent anti-crime, robust policies ( such as have been embraced by both major parties for over 15 years in the States ) and now with the appointment of the hand-wringing ['I feel the Muslims' pain'] European Convention - incorporating, dripping wet Dominic Grieve as shadow H-S things have got even worse. And David Davis is on record as saying what a wonderful H-S Dominic will be ! SO if there were a candidate in Haltemprice arguing for robust criminal justice policies, including '42 days' for what it's worth, David Davis just might have a bit of a fight on his hands. And the Great and the Good of London left-liberal civil liberties- ism, Shami, Bob, Glenda and the rest wouldn't be much use in such a contest.

Chingford Man

Rhys,

Why do you think that "anti-crime, robust policies" necessitates a draconian extension of state power? If we did have meaningful law enforcement then we wouldn't need drastic infringements of civil liberty.

New Labour always resorts to "tough" legislation to divert attention from its inability to enforce the rule of law. That's what 42 Days is all about.

Oh and David Davis may be many things but he is no dripping left wing softie.

Speccie was my favourite Magazine

Careful Fraser. The tedious Westminster consensus might - I say might - just have got this one wrong. The Internet means that articles - together with their confident predictions - are preserved for our subsequent amusement and mockery. Forever. Just a thought.

David L Nilsson

Maybe David Davis has decided that long years in opposition has caused bis career to miss the boat, and that younger Tories will be the driving forces in their next Cabinet. So what? If he chooses to go out on a high note, defending our traditional liberties instead of quietly creeping into boardrooms and the Lords, good for him.

Fraser Nelson is typical of the professionally deformed scribblers who can only write about these matters as if they were sporting contests-- with everything reduced to splits, personality clashes, class jealousies and careerist manoeuvrings. It soon becomes enervating, which is why politics rarely engage serious people's attentioo these days and are a falling market in media coverage.

We great unwashed in the great big world may seem hopelessly naive to his kind, but most people I know, from all parties and none, have found Mr Davis a breath of fresh air. It's the Nelsons who have stank the room out.

Susan Wade Weeks

The mismatch between what ne reads in the papers and what people say about David Davis to each other is mystifying. Thousands of Conservatives have flocked to support him and have pledged campaign help. Many more thousands of Labour and Lib Dem voters have found his stance admirable. They are posting all over the internet. How do journalists not pick this up?

Kiffa

Fraser: who says we want a centre-left consensus?
Where did that come from? Anyone ask us?

Just a thought

Kiffa

The last time there was a consensus like this, Heath was in charge (not)

Just a thougtht

Puzzled Perry

Why might there be two (or more) sets of comments for this piece? I'm sure I have seen my comment somewhere, - or has it been deleted?

Dodgy Geezer

Alas, your comments may well be right. Davis has made much, and his supporters have flocked to him, on the grounds of principle. It is a huge condemnation of current politics that simply claiming a principle can unite Labour, Liberal and Conservative voters, all of whom have praised Davis in recent weeks.

But what is this principle? It is that 42 days is too many, but 28 seems about right, given current police experience, which may, of course, change in the future. This may be a defendable position, but it is pragmatism, NOT principle. The principle is that people should not be held without charge, pure and simple. And Davis refuses to support this.

Davis, on his blog, has called for open debate on the subject of freedoms. And then he has said, when asked about his support for 28 days uncharged detention, that he has seen the secret justifications from the police, and they convinced him, so we must take his word that they are convincing. This is the Iraq technique for suppressing debate.

I am saddened to have to say this, for I wished Davis well when he first resigned, and the Westminister Village, completely ignorant of the concept of principle, descended on him, driven by the spin doctors. The commentators helplessness was plain to see - what was a 'principle'; how could a politician have one? This must be some kind of trick.

I really thought that Davis was striking an old-fashioned blow for Middle England, where principles are what you die for.
But I'm afraid that the concept must have been dead too long. Davies will, of course, be re-elected, as a champion of pragmatic principle, a paradox worthy of GKC. And the next election posters will all carry messages extolling the 'principled virtues' of each major party....